How can Trump-believers be persuaded that he lost an honest election?

[Chuck Naill]

Stock market looking good dude!!

[dneal]

Nancy Pelosi made $10M in the last month alone!

[Chuck Naill]

Excellent!! Now back to the topic.

[dneal]

Excellent!! Now back to the topic.

I'll help here too. You just posted "self-appointed moderator" in a different thread. Your attempts work at cross purposes, and therefore fail.

[welch]

2020 Electoral College results

Biden: 306 Trump: 232 A 74 vote difference. This means you would need to find 38 electoral votes that were won by Biden via fraud or mistake or etc, that should have going to Trump.

You really don’t know what goes on in the world, do you?

Pennsylvania: 20
Wisconsin: 10
Michigan: 16
Georgia: 16

62 electoral votes in the 4 States with questionable results. That’s the argument from the Trump campaign.

If they went the other way, the result is Biden: 244 Trump: 294

Nonsense. Republicans challenged each of these results. Courts examined the evidence and judges dismissed the cases. You read the decisions as well as I did. mhosea tells us that he "suspects" that the Democratic Party stuffed ballot boxes with mail-in ballots, but ignores cases after case in which judges found against his suspicion. I "suspect" that the moon is made of green cheese, and, like mhosea, maybe I should ignore all evidence.

Notice that this thread began about January 6, when a crowd of election-deniers attacked the Capitol as they tried to stop Congress from counting the electoral votes, delivered in December, that eventually made Joe Biden President of the US.

After all the vote counts were certified by election officials, after all the Republican challenges were examined by judges and dismissed, several hundred Trump-supporters tried to stop the peaceful transfer of power to VP Biden. That's what this thread is about.

[dneal]

Nonsense?

Warbler found the electoral lead of 74 votes, and the possibility one could find 38 electoral votes, an unreasonable notion. I responded by noting that the four contentious states easily exceeded the number. The math is correct, and therefore not nonsense.

Your bias apparently interpreted that to something completely different than what was written, yet you can't (or won't) acknowledge that bias.

But let's do notice how this thread began. I find this poster - who is not a member of the daily bickering club - reasonable in their assessment

The heated political rhetoric, on both sides of the aisle, isn't helping anything. There is no longer political discourse, no discussions of issues using reason and logic, and we no longer have the ability as a society to agree to disagree on issues.
Instead we have name calling without substance, each side demonizing the other as evil Hitlers bent on total destruction.

To wit the opening of this thread:
"must coddle right-wing delusion"

Opening a discussion in this manner is opening it in bad faith, a complete unwillingness to enter with an open mind and to engage the discussion on its merits. That was equally true of the title, which amounts to no more than, "How can I convince you you're wrong." You most certainly won't convince anyone of anything in this manner.

Substantive discussion can only come on neutral terms. There must be a willingness to listen and to consider which is not there when the discussion starts with insult. Each side of this dispute is stuck in their echo chambers, absolute that they are correct, and unwilling to look at any source that disagrees with their sensibilities. The fact is that none of us possess the absolute truth, the most that we can do is to seek it in earnest and in the hope that we can get that little bit closer. It is a sad condition that so few try.